Former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes in his launch video for his 2026 gubernatorial campaign. | Photo courtesy Mandela Barnes for Wisconsin campaign

Former Lt. Gov. and Senate candidate Mandela Barnes launched his campaign for governor on Tuesday — pledging to stand up to the Trump administration and work to make Wisconsin more affordable.

The 2026 gubernatorial election is the first open race for governor since 2010 and Barnes joins a crowded field of Democratic hopefuls. Some of those candidates include Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez, state Sen. Kelda Roys (D-Madison), state Rep. Francesca Hong (D-Madison), Milwaukee County Exec. David Crowley and former Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation CEO Missy Hughes.

There are about 10 months until the August primary. 

In his announcement video, Barnes accuses President Donald Trump and the federal government of looking the other way as working people struggle to keep up with costs. He says the state needs to reject the “Washington Way” and get things done the “Wisconsin Way.”

The video kicks off with Barnes highlighting his family ties to unions, grabbing a jacket with the insignia of UAW, Local 1866, which is the Oak Creek chapter of the United Auto Workers union. He says it belongs to his dad who “wore it everywhere because being part of a union wasn’t just a job.” In the video, construction workers walk behind Barnes while he speaks. 

“It meant you looked out for each other. It meant you had each other’s backs,” Barnes continues, adding that union jobs helped people afford a home, support their families and save for retirement. “That’s not the case anymore. Seems like the harder you work, the more Washington looks the other way. Lower taxes for billionaires, higher prices for working people.” 

“Under Trump, the name of the game has been distraction and chaos to avoid accountability,” Barnes says.  “It’s not about the real world. It’s a show. Outrage. Performances. Everybody trying to go viral. Meanwhile, families doing everything right are still falling behind.” 

Barnes also announced Tuesday that he plans to kick off his campaign with a tour across the state, with stops in Madison, Milwaukee and Green Bay this week. He said he plans to meet voters to hear about their concerns about rising costs and to share his vision to improve affordability. According to a press release from his campaign, Barnes as governor would seek to expand BadgerCare — Wisconsin’s Medicaid program — and “close tax loopholes for the ultra-rich so we can cut taxes for middle-class families.” 

“It isn’t about left or right. It’s not about who can yell the loudest,” Barnes says in his ad. “It’s about whether people can afford to live in the state they call home. A state where you can afford your health care, where your kids can learn a skill and stay close to home, where a good day’s work earns a good day’s pay and where families can not only get by, but thrive.”

Barnes will need to overcome concerns about his prior statewide loss to U.S. Senator Ron Johnson as he campaigns to win the Democratic nomination.

In the 2022 Senate race, Barnes won the Democratic nomination after the crowded field thinned and when some high-profile Democrats dropped out in the weeks before the primary date. He lost his general election challenge to Johnson, who had been considered one of the most beatable Republican incumbents in the country for Democrats, by a narrow margin. 

Before launching his campaign, Barnes had already faced pushback to his run for governor due to that 2022 loss.

The New York Times reported in October that some Wisconsin Democrats were uneasy about Barnes running statewide in 2026. A few days later the Milwaukee Courier, the city’s longest-running Black-owned newspaper, published an opinion piece urging Barnes not to run, saying the state couldn’t risk another loss. The Courier noted that Barnes ran 50,000 votes behind Gov. Tony Evers in 2022, with Evers winning a second term that year. Barnes lost the Senate race by a little over 26,000 votes.

“We need a candidate who can unite this state — and win. Mandela Barnes already showed us he can’t,” the Milwaukee Courier oped stated.

Barnes is pushing back on that narrative. In his campaign ad, he says he knows how to “bring people together” and “how to get things done.” 

“I’m running for governor because this jacket wasn’t just something my dad wore. It was a promise,” Barnes says. “We show up. We look out for each other.”

Barnes served in the Wisconsin State Assembly for two terms from 2013 to 2017 before he was elected as the state’s first Black lieutenant governor. He won the lieutenant governor nomination in 2018 in a two-person race, going on to win on the same ticket as Evers.

Since losing the Senate race in 2022, Barnes has served as president of Power to the Polls Wisconsin, a community-based organizing project focused on getting people out to vote. According to his campaign, he led a team that helped knock on over a million doors to engage infrequent voters and improve turnout and get people out to vote for Supreme Court Justice Janet Protasiewicz and Justice Susan Crawford in their successive winning campaigns. 

The primary election is scheduled for Aug. 11, 2026. The Republican field is less crowded with U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, considered the front runner, and Washington County Executive Josh Schoemann the only announced candidates.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A Delray Beach, Fla., police officer speaks with a driver in 2019. The Trump administration wants access to state driver’s license data through a computer network used by law enforcement to share records across state lines. (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

Four Republican states have agreed to help the Trump administration gain access to state driver’s license data through a nationwide law enforcement computer network as part of the administration’s hunt for alleged noncitizen voters.

The Trump administration said as recently as October that federal officials wanted to obtain driver’s license records through the network.

The commitment from officials in Florida, Indiana, Iowa and Ohio comes as part of a settlement agreement filed on Friday in a federal lawsuit. The lawsuit was originally brought by the states last year alleging the Biden administration wasn’t doing enough to help states verify voter eligibility.

The settlement, between the states and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, requires the federal department to continue its development of a powerful citizenship verification program known as SAVE. Earlier this year, federal officials repurposed SAVE into a program capable of scanning millions of state voter records for instances of noncitizen registered voters.

In return, the states have agreed to support Homeland Security’s efforts to access the National Law Enforcement Telecommunications System, an obscure computer network that typically allows law enforcement agencies to search driver’s license records across state lines. Nlets — as the system is known — lets police officers easily look up the driving records of out-of-state motorists.

The Trump administration and some Republican election officials have promoted the changes to SAVE as a useful tool to identify potential noncitizen voters, and Indiana had already agreed to provide voter records. Critics, including some Democrats, say the Trump administration is building a massive database of U.S. residents that President Donald Trump or a future president could use for spying or targeting political enemies.

Stateline reported last week, before the settlement agreement was filed in court, that Homeland Security publicly confirmed it wants to connect Nlets to SAVE.

A notice published Oct. 31 in the Federal Register said driver’s licenses are the most widely used form of identification, and that by working with states and national agencies, including Nlets, “SAVE will use driver’s license and state identification card numbers to check and confirm identity information.”

A federal official also previously told a virtual meeting of state election officials in May that Homeland Security was seeking “to avoid having to connect to 50 state databases” and wanted a “simpler solution,” such as Nlets, according to government records published by the transparency group American Oversight.

The new settlement lays out the timeline for how the Trump administration could acquire the four states’ records.

Within 90 days of the execution of the agreement, the four states may provide Homeland Security with 1,000 randomly selected driver’s license records from their state for verification as part of a quality improvement process for SAVE.

According to the agreement, the states that provide the records will “make best efforts to support and encourage DHS’s efforts to receive and have full use of state driver’s license records from the National Law Enforcement Telecommunications System” and state driver’s license agencies.

The language in the agreement is open-ended and doesn’t make clear whether the pledge to help Homeland Security obtain access to Nlets is limited to drivers from those four states or is intended to require the states to help the agency acquire the records of drivers nationwide.

An agreement to help

The agreement could pave the way for Republican officials in other states to provide access to license data.

Nlets is a nonprofit organization that facilitates data sharing among law enforcement agencies across state lines. States decide what information to make available through Nlets, and which agencies can access it. That means the four states could try to influence peers to share Nlets data with the Trump administration.

“They’re not just talking about driver’s license numbers, they’re talking about the driver’s records. What possible reason would DHS have in an election or voting context — or any context whatsoever — for obtaining the ‘full use of state driver’s license records,’” said David Becker, executive director of the nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation & Research.

Iowa Secretary of State Paul Pate, a Republican, said in a statement to Stateline that the settlement agreement provides another layer of election integrity and protection as officials seek to ensure only eligible voters are registered. He didn’t directly address questions about Nlets access.

“The SAVE program provides us with critical information, but we must also continue to utilize information from other state and federal partners to maintain clean and accurate lists,” Pate said in the statement.

Two weeks before the Nov. 5, 2024, election, Pate issued guidance to Iowa county auditors to challenge the ballots of 2,176 registered voters who were identified by the secretary of state’s office as potential noncitizens. The voters had reported to the state Department of Transportation or another government entity that they were not U.S. citizens in the past 12 years and went on to register to vote, according to the guidance.

In March, Pate said his office gained access to the SAVE database and found 277 of those people were confirmed to not have U.S. citizenship — just under 12% of the individuals identified as potential noncitizens.

Homeland Security and the U.S. Department of Justice didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment Monday.

Matthew Tragesser, a spokesperson for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services — the agency under Homeland Security that oversees SAVE — told Stateline last week that USCIS was committed to “eliminating barriers to securing the nation’s electoral process.”

“By allowing states to efficiently verify voter eligibility, we are reinforcing the principle that America’s elections are reserved exclusively for American citizens,” Tragesser said in a statement.

The SAVE program — Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements — was originally intended to help state and local officials verify the immigration status of individual noncitizens seeking government benefits. In the past, SAVE could search only one name at a time. Now it can conduct bulk searches; federal officials in May also connected the program to Social Security data.

“It’s a potentially dangerous mix to put driver’s license and Social Security number and date of birth information out there … where we really don’t know yet how and when and where it’s going to be used,” Minnesota Democratic Secretary of State Steve Simon said in an interview on Monday.

Democratic states object

As the Trump administration has encouraged states to use SAVE, the Justice Department has also demanded states provide the department with unredacted copies of their voter rolls. The Trump administration has previously confirmed the Justice Department is sharing voter information with Homeland Security.

The Justice Department has sued six, mostly Democratic, states for refusing to turn over the data. Those lawsuits remain pending.

On Monday, 12 state secretaries of state submitted a 29-page public comment, in response to SAVE’s Federal Register notice, criticizing the overhaul. The secretaries wrote that while Homeland Security claims the changes make the program an effective tool for verifying voters, the modifications are “likely to degrade, not enhance” states’ efforts to ensure free, fair and secure elections.

“What the modified system will do … is allow the federal government to capture sensitive data on hundreds of millions of voters nationwide and distribute that information as it sees fit,” the secretaries wrote.

The secretaries of state of California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington signed on to the comment.

The settlement agreement purports to make this year’s changes to SAVE legally binding.

The agreement asks that a federal court retain jurisdiction over the case for 20 years for the purposes of enforcing it — a move that in theory could make it harder for a future Democratic president to reverse the changes to SAVE.

But Becker, of the Center for Election Innovation & Research, said he doesn’t expect the settlement agreement would make it more difficult for a future administration to undo the overhaul.

“Should a different administration come in that disagrees with this approach,” Becker said, “I would expect that they would almost certainly completely change how the system operates and how the states can access it and what data the federal government procures.”

Iowa Capital Dispatch reporter Robin Opsahl contributed to this report. Stateline reporter Jonathan Shorman can be reached at jshorman@stateline.org.

Arizona Democratic U.S. Sen. Mark Kelly speaks with reporters in the Mansfield Room of the U.S. Capitol on Monday, Dec. 1, 2025. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)   

WASHINGTON — Arizona Democratic U.S. Sen. Mark Kelly said Monday the threat of a court-martial for a video he and other senators released telling military members not to follow illegal orders is an effort to silence the president’s political opponents. 

Kelly, a retired Navy captain, was one of six Democratic lawmakers with backgrounds in the military or intelligence agencies who appeared in the video that was posted on social media in mid-November. 

President Donald Trump alleged the lawmakers had committed “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!” for telling members of the military and intelligence communities that they “can” and “must refuse illegal orders.”

Kelly said during a press conference that he and his wife, former U.S. Rep. Gabby Giffords, who survived being shot during a town hall in 2011, have experienced a sharp increase in threats in the weeks since Trump reacted negatively to the video. 

“My family knows the cost of political violence. My wife, Gabby, was shot in the head and nearly died while speaking with her constituents,” Kelly said. “The president should understand this too. He has been the target of political violence himself.”

Kelly then listed off other recent instances of political violence, including the killing of Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, the arson at the official home of Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro and the assassination of conservative commentator Charlie Kirk during a rally at Utah Valley University. 

“Every other president we have ever had in the history of this nation would have tried to heal the country,” Kelly said. “But we all know Donald Trump, he uses every single opportunity to divide us, and that’s dangerous.”

The Defense Department has announced officials are looking into recalling Kelly to active duty for a potential court-martial. The FBI has also contacted the House and Senate Sergeant at Arms to request interviews with the six lawmakers in the video. 

Kelly said he and the other Democrats in the video would not be intimidated or silenced by Trump’s comments or the investigations.

“It’s a dangerous moment for the United States of America when the president and his loyalists use every lever of power to silence United States senators for speaking up,” Kelly said. “But we all know that this isn’t about me and it’s not about the others in that video.

“They’re trying to send a message to retired service members, to government employees, the members of the military, to elected officials and to all Americans who are thinking about speaking up — you better keep your mouth shut, or else.”

Video caused stir

The lawmakers’ video reminded servicemembers they’d sworn an oath to the Constitution, something Kelly said shouldn’t have been controversial. 

“No one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our Constitution. We know this is hard and that it’s a difficult time to be a public servant,” the Democrats said in the video. “But whether you’re serving in the CIA, in the Army, or Navy, or the Air Force, your vigilance is critical.”

Kelly declined to say directly during the press conference if the video was a response to ongoing strikes on boats in the Caribbean Sea that Trump and others in the administration have said are shipping illegal substances to the United States. 

“I think it’s good for people to get a reminder. And we wanted to show that we had their back and we understood the situation they were in,” Kelly said. “And we said something that is in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, according to the law of armed combat.”

Investigations opened

The House and Senate Armed Services Committees have each opened investigations into the strikes after The Washington Post reported that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth gave a verbal order to make sure everyone died during a Sept. 2 strike on one of the boats. 

Kelly said that he has “tremendous confidence” in committee Chairman Roger Wicker of Mississippi and ranking member Jack Reed of Rhode Island. But he repeatedly criticized Hegseth as unqualified, saying he often “runs around on a stage like he’s a 12-year-old playing army.” 

“If there is anyone who needs to answer questions in public and under oath, it is Pete Hegseth,” Kelly said. 

The Armed Services Committee, he said, should have both a public hearing and one for senators in a classified setting to get more details on the strikes on boats off the coast of Venezuela, including whether the Trump administration has a strategy. 

Kelly said if Trump wants to remove Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, then he must make that clear so Congress can have a debate and Americans can have a say in a potential war.

“Regime change as a policy in the United States, generally, in our history, has not worked out well. Think of South Vietnam, think of the Bay of Pigs, Iraq and Afghanistan. It results in the deaths of U.S. service members without the intended outcome,” Kelly said. “And in this case, I don’t even think we know the intended outcome. The president needs to make a case to the American people when he is about to put thousands of American men and women in harm’s way.”

A makeshift memorial of flowers and American flags honoring the late West Virginia National Guard member Sarah Beckstrom stands outside the Farragut West Metro station on Dec. 1, 2025 in Washington, D.C.  (Photo by Heather Diehl/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump has accelerated his drive to curb legal immigration, after a native of Afghanistan who had been granted asylum was accused in a shooting in the nation’s capital that left one member of the West Virginia National Guard dead and another in critical condition.

“In the wake of last week’s atrocity, it is more important than ever to finish carrying out the president’s mass deportation operation,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said during Monday’s press briefing. “They must go back to their home countries.”

The Trump administration at the beginning of the president’s second term launched an unprecedented crackdown on all forms of immigration. The deadly shooting on the eve of the Thanksgiving holiday, in a commercial area of the District of Columbia just blocks from the White House, has intensified the push.

The Department of Homeland Security in a social media post after the Wednesday attack called for immigrants to “remigrate,” which is a far-right concept in Europe that calls for the ethnic removal of non-white minority populations through mass migration.

“There is more work to be done,” Leavitt said, “because President Trump believes that he has a sacred obligation to reverse the calamity of mass unchecked migration into our country.”

The suspect in the guard shooting is a 29-year-old Afghan national who entered the country during the Biden administration through a special immigrant visa program for Afghan allies after the chaotic U.S. withdrawal from the country in 2021. 

Authorities identified him as Rahmanullah Lakanwal, who worked for a CIA counterterrorism operation in Afghanistan, according to the New York Times. He was granted asylum under the Trump administration earlier this year.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia plans to charge Lakanwal with first-degree murder after one of the National Guard soldiers, U.S. Army Spc. Sarah Beckstrom, 20, died as a result of her injuries. 

Still hospitalized is U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe, 24. Trump has indicated he intends to honor both Beckstrom and Wolfe at the White House.

District officials said the shooting of guard members was “targeted,” but the motive remains under investigation. 

Pauses on asylum

Leavitt said the Trump administration will continue “to limit migration, both illegal and legal,” after the shooting.

Separately on Wednesday, the administration ended Temporary Protected Status for more than 330,000 nationals from Haiti, opening them up for deportations by February. 

Within hours of Wednesday’s shooting, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services halted all immigration requests from Afghanistan nationals. On Thursday, USCIS head Joseph Edlow announced that by direction of Trump the agency would reexamine every green card application from “every country of concern,” which are the 19 countries on the president’s travel ban list.  

And by Friday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio directed all U.S. embassies to suspend all visa approvals for individuals with passports from Afghanistan. 

Over the weekend, Trump told reporters that those pauses on asylum could last “a long time,” although it’s unclear what authority the executive branch has to suspend a law created by Congress through the 1980 Refugee Act. 

This is not the first time Trump has tried to end asylum this year, as there is a legal challenge to the president barring asylum seekers from making asylum claims at U.S. ports of entry.

Venezuelan boat strikes

During Monday’s press conference, Leavitt also defended the Trump administration’s continued deadly strikes on boats off the coast of Venezuela allegedly containing drugs. The attacks have been occurring since September. 

The president and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth have stated, without evidence, that the boats’ operators are narco-terrorists and that the strikes are legal, since they have taken place in international waters. Roughly 80 people have been killed in nearly two dozen attacks since September. 

Leavitt disputed any questions of wrongdoing by the administration during a Sept. 2 strike, when two survivors clinging to boat wreckage were allegedly killed by a follow-on strike, as first reported by The Washington Post Friday.

“President Trump and Secretary Hegseth have made it clear that presidentially designated narco-terrorist groups are subject to lethal targeting in accordance with the laws of war,” Leavitt said, adding that Hegseth authorized a military commander to conduct the operation.

However, the attacks have raised concern among members of Congress, and following the Post story, the U.S. Senate and House Armed Services committees moved to open bipartisan inquiries into the military strikes, with a focus on the alleged follow-on attack that killed two survivors. 

How the National Guard wound up in the district

Trump initially mobilized 800 National Guard troops to the nation’s capital in August after claiming a “crime emergency” in the district, despite a documented three-decade low in crime.

Many were instructed they would be carrying service weapons, The Wall Street Journal reported on Aug. 17. The White House effort was accompanied by a heightened U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement presence in the district.

The mobilization then became tied up in court for months.

A federal district judge in the District of Columbia found the administration’s deployment of more than 2,000 guard troops in the city illegal but stayed her Nov. 20 decision for three weeks to give the administration time to appeal and remove the guard members from the district’s streets.

The guard troops had been expected to remain in the district through the end of February.

The administration filed an emergency motion in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia for a stay to be issued on the order by Thursday. The administration filed the emergency motion the same day as the attack on the two National Guard members.

Trump ordered an additional 500 guard members to the district following the shooting.

The Joint Task Force District of Columbia has been overseeing guard operations in the district, including units from the district, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee and West Virginia.

Sign for the Wisconsin Elections Comission. (Wisconsin Examiner photo)

The Wisconsin Elections Commission voted unanimously Monday to modify its order imposing a number of requirements on the Madison city clerk’s office due to the loss of nearly 200 absentee ballots in the 2024 election. 

In August, the commission ordered the city to make a number of changes to its election practices in an effort to prevent the loss of future ballots. 

The original order requires the city to develop an internal plan delineating which employee is responsible for statutorily required tasks, change the absentee ballot processing system so bags and envelopes aren’t lost, update instructional materials for poll workers and complete a full inspection of all materials before the scheduled board of canvassers meeting after an election. 

In a special meeting on Monday, the commission voted 6-0 to approve a request from newly appointed clerk Clerk Lydia McComas to modify a section of the order about the timing of printing and preparing poll books. 

Under the original order, Madison is required to print its poll books no earlier than the Tuesday before an election and must arrange to receive those books no later than the Friday before the election. 

McComas told the commission in a memo that the city had found a vendor that could print the poll books on the Friday before an election and deliver them by the Sunday before the election. This would allow the final printed poll books to include as many absentee ballots as possible, limiting the number of absentee ballots that are returned after the poll books are printed. 

In her memo, McComas wrote that the modification would allow the city to achieve its “shared goal” with the commission of reducing “the chance of human error.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth testifies before the House Appropriations Committee's Defense Subcommittee on June 10, 2025.  (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate and House Armed Services committees will open bipartisan inquiries into U.S. military strikes on suspected drug-running boats in the Caribbean Sea, with a focus on an alleged follow-on attack that The Washington Post reported killed two survivors of the initial operation.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Roger Wicker, R-Miss., and ranking member Jack Reed, D-R.I., issued a joint statement Friday promising “vigorous oversight” of the killings.

“The Committee is aware of recent news reports — and the Department of Defense’s initial response — regarding alleged follow-on strikes on suspected narcotics vessels in the SOUTHCOM (Southern Command) area of responsibility. The Committee has directed inquiries to the Department, and we will be conducting vigorous oversight to determine the facts related to these circumstances,” Wicker and Reed said.

Similarly, House Armed Services Committee Chair Mike Rogers, R-Ala., and ranking member Adam Smith, D-Wash., said in a joint statement Saturday that the panel “is committed to providing rigorous oversight of the Department of Defense’s military operations in the Caribbean.”

“We take seriously the reports of follow-on strikes on boats alleged to be ferrying narcotics in the SOUTHCOM region and are taking bipartisan action to gather a full accounting of the operation in question,” according to the statement.

The inquiries mark a rare bipartisan check on President Donald Trump’s administration since his second term began in January. With the exception of voting to release the federal case files on convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, which Trump eventually endorsed, Republicans have largely left Trump’s decisions and policies unchallenged.

Follow-on attack reported

Lawmakers’ attention was retrained on the already legally questionable U.S. operations targeting alleged narcotics boats after an investigative report published Friday by The Washington Post revealed Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth gave verbal orders to kill everyone during a Sept. 2 operation —  the first of several U.S. boat strikes in the Caribbean Sea that have killed roughly 80.

According to the report, two survivors clung to burning wreckage after an initial hit. Adm. Frank M. “Mitch” Bradley, who was commanding the attack from Fort Bragg in North Carolina, ordered a second, or follow-on, strike to fulfill Hegseth’s order and kill the remaining survivors. States Newsroom has not independently confirmed the details.

Hegseth called the report “fabricated, inflammatory, and derogatory,” in a post on social media Friday.

Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., told CBS News’ “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on Sunday the follow-on strike could rise “to the level of a war crime if it’s true.”

“If that reporting is true, it’s a clear violation of the DoD’s own laws of war, as well as international laws about the way you treat people who are in that circumstance,” Kaine said.

A working group of former military lawyers issued a statement Friday urging Congress to investigate the Sept. 2 strike.

“Since orders to kill survivors of an attack at sea are ‘patently illegal,’ anyone who issues or follows such orders can and should be prosecuted for war crimes, murder, or both,” according to the statement published by Just Security, a journal focused on national security published by the New York University School of Law Reiss Center on Law and Security.

A bipartisan effort, led by Kaine, to stop Trump’s deadly strikes in the Caribbean narrowly failed in the Senate in early November.

White House confirms second strike

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt was met with numerous questions about the Post report at Monday’s press briefing.

A reporter asked Leavitt, “Does the administration deny that that second strike happened, or did it happen and the administration denies that Secretary Hegseth gave the order?”

“The latter is true, and I have a statement to read for you here,” Leavitt said, adding that Trump and Hegseth have authority to conduct lethal attacks on designated narco-terrorist groups.

“With respect to the strikes in question on Sept. 2, Secretary Hegseth authorized Admiral Bradley to conduct these kinetic strikes,” she said. “Admiral Bradley worked well within his authority and the law directing the engagement to ensure the boat was destroyed and the threat to the United States of America was eliminated.”

Leavitt’s statement was not entirely consistent with Hegseth’s denial on Friday, in which he called the reporting “fabricated.”

Trump echoes Hegseth denial

Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One on Sunday he “wouldn’t have wanted that” when asked about the alleged follow-on strike that killed the two survivors.

“The first strike was very lethal. It was fine, and if there were two people around — but Pete (Hegseth) said that didn’t happen,” Trump told reporters. 

“Pete said he did not order the death of those two men,” Trump continued in a back-and-forth with the press.

Trump also said Saturday he was closing the airspace above Venezuela, but told a reporter who asked Sunday if the move previewed a U.S. airstrike of the country not to “read anything into it.”

“To all Airlines, Pilots, Drug Dealers, and Human Traffickers, please consider THE AIRSPACE ABOVE AND SURROUNDING VENEZUELA TO BE CLOSED IN ITS ENTIRETY,” he wrote on his own social media platform just before 8 a.m. Eastern Saturday.

Trump confirmed reports he spoke to Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro late last month but would not reveal details of the conversation.

The U.S. has been amassing Navy vessels and troops off the coast of Venezuela for months, including the recent addition in mid-November of the Navy’s most advanced aircraft carrier, the USS Gerald Ford.

The shore of Lake Superior near Ashland. (Henry Redman | Wisconsin Examiner)

A rule to protect Wisconsin’s cleanest waterways from being harmed was finalized last week over the objections of Republican legislators and allied lobbying groups. 

The rule highlights the ongoing dispute between the Legislature and the administration of Gov. Tony Evers over the level of oversight legislators are allowed to have over the administrative rulemaking process. Earlier this year, the state Supreme Court issued a ruling that curtailed the ability of the Legislature to kill administrative rules. 

The new rule, which was published in the state’s administrative register Nov. 24 and is set to go into effect July 1, is the result of a decade of wrangling. 

In 2015, the U.S. EPA updated the Clean Water Act’s antidegradation regulations — which guide how states are required to protect high quality lakes and rivers from pollution. 

Dozens of creeks, rivers and lakes are classified as outstanding resource waters and exceptional resource waters under Wisconsin’s administrative code and will be protected as “high quality waters” under the new rule. Additionally, a body of water can be considered a high quality water if it has contaminant levels that are better than an established statewide standard. 

“This means that a waterbody can be high quality for one or more parameters, even if it is impaired for a different parameter,” Laura Dietrich, manager of the Department of Natural Resources’ water evaluation section, said in an email. “For example, a waterbody may be impaired for phosphorus, but chloride levels are better than the chloride water quality criterion. The waterbody would be considered high quality for the purposes of considering new or increased discharges of chloride, but would not be high quality for phosphorus.” 

Under the new rule, the DNR will be required to conduct a review before regulated entities are allowed to discharge new or increased levels of contaminants into the water body. Discharges may be allowed if found to be necessary through a “social or economic analysis.”

The rule’s finalization is the end of a process that began in 2023 and has included multiple public hearings and the input of several legislative committees. 

Last month, the Assembly committee on the environment voted 4-2 to request modifications to the rule, but the DNR and the Evers administration moved forward with finalizing the rule anyway. 

That action has angered Republicans who want more say in the process. 

“Representative government has been taken away and we now have rule by king,” Rep. Joy Goeben (R-Hobart) said in a statement. “We don’t want a king and the current path forward is dangerous.”

Lobbying groups have also complained about the rule’s finalization. 

Scott Manley, a lobbyist for Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, the state’s largest business group, told Wisconsin Public Radio that the rule going into effect is “terrible from a representative government standpoint.” 

Erik Kanter, government relations director with Clean Wisconsin, told the Wisconsin Examiner that he thinks the rule represents the DNR finding a solid compromise between environmental and business concerns and that WMC was involved in the entire process through an advisory committee. 

“DNR engaged the stakeholder group regularly over the 30-month process it took to put the rule together at the DNR, and so WMC, along the way, had all the opportunity, and certainly took the opportunity, to make their thoughts [known] on how to put this rule together,” Kanter said. “It almost feels like it was never going to be enough for WMC.” 

Kanter also said that because the rule aligns the state with the EPA regulations, the state doesn’t have a choice if it wants to retain regulatory authority over its own water. 

“Wisconsin has to do this. We have to update our own rules to comply with federal changes to the Clean Water Act,” he said. “There’s no two ways about it if we want to maintain our delegation authority and have state regulators in charge of administering the Clean Water Act. It’s something we have to do.”

The alternative would be for the federal EPA to administer the act in Wisconsin, he said. 

“I think a lot of folks in the business community wouldn’t want EPA and the federal government breathing down their neck,” Kanter said. “And so this delegated authority situation is, I think, better for everybody.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Boxes of the diabetes drug Ozempic rest on a pharmacy counter in Los Angeles. Drugs like Ozempic have grown in popularity to treat obesity, prompting more than a dozen states to pay for them. But with major budget pressures, several state Medicaid agencies are either stopping coverage altogether or restricting who can get access to the therapy. (Photo illustration by Mario Tama/Getty Images)

Some states are rethinking their coverage of GLP-1 drugs for weight loss as budgets tighten and Medicaid programs brace for the cuts included in President Donald Trump’s broad tax and spending law.

As of Oct. 1, 16 state Medicaid programs covered GLP-1s for obesity treatment, up from 13 last year, according to a survey of Medicaid directors by KFF, a health policy research group. But some states have announced they will discontinue coverage or restrict who can qualify for it.

Many doctors and patient advocates say the drugs will save money in the long run by reducing obesity-related diseases such as heart disease and diabetes. Many states, however, have concluded they just can’t afford them.

North Carolina Medicaid ended coverage of GLP-1s for obesity last month, citing shortfalls in state funding. California, New Hampshire and South Carolina have said they will end coverage on Jan. 1. Starting next year, Michigan Medicaid will limit coverage to people who are “morbidly obese.” Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Wisconsin also are considering new restrictions.

In last year’s KFF survey, about half the states said they were interested in covering GLP-1s for weight loss, according to Elizabeth Williams, a senior policy manager at KFF who focuses on Medicaid. This year, most states are moving in the opposite direction.

“This likely reflects recent state budget challenges and the significant, significant costs associated with coverage,” Williams said. “After a number of years of robust revenue growth right after the pandemic, states are starting to see slowing revenues, increasing spending demands and a lot of fiscal uncertainty due in part to recent federal actions.”

In April, the Trump administration scrapped a Biden-era proposal that would have required state Medicaid programs to pay for some GLP-1s for obesity treatment. Earlier this month, Trump announced that his administration had reached agreements with the manufacturers of Wegovy and Zepbound to reduce the prices of the drugs for Medicaid, Medicare and consumers buying the drugs directly, But it’s unclear whether the deals will reduce costs for states.

Health plans for state workers also are reassessing their coverage of the drugs for obesity. North Carolina, for example, ended GLP-1 obesity coverage for state workers last year, and West Virginia canceled a 1,000-person pilot program.

GLP-1 medications, which balance blood sugar levels, have long been prescribed to patients with Type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular conditions. All state Medicaid programs, which are funded jointly by the states and the federal government, cover GLP-1s for those uses.

But the drugs also curb hunger signals and can help people lose significant amounts of weight. Medications such as Ozempic, Wegovy and Zepbound have become wildly popular for that purpose.

Between 2019 and 2023, the number of outpatient Medicaid prescriptions for select GLP-1s to treat diabetes and obesity grew from 755,300 to 3.8 million, according to KFF. During the same period, Medicaid spending on those drugs increased from $597.3 million to $3.9 billion.

A study published last year in The BMJ, the journal of the British Medical Association, found that the number of patients without diabetes who started GLP-1 treatment in the United States increased from roughly 21,000 in 2019 to 174,000 in 2023, or more than 700%.

More than 2 in 5 U.S. adults have obesity, according to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The CDC defines obesity as having a body mass index — a calculated measure of body weight relative to height — of 30 or higher. Obesity costs the U.S. health care system almost $173 billion per year, according to the agency.

Recently, the manufacturers of some GLP-1s have lowered their prices, selling them directly to consumers for $500 or less per month. But many patients cannot afford to pay that much out of pocket.

States in a tough financial position

In North Carolina, Dr. Jennifer McCauley, a weight management physician at UNC Health, said Medicaid coverage of GLP-1s was “incredibly helpful for our patients.”

“Now they’ve stopped coverage, so those people are now going back, regaining some of the weight, because they’re unable to obtain these medications, and also are suffering the health consequences of obesity,” McCauley told Stateline.

Some critics of expansive GLP-1 coverage say it isn’t cost effective, because many patients gain back the weight they lost when they stop treatment. But McCauley said the “downstream effects of obesity are even higher.”

“There are definitely vulnerable populations that probably would not be able to obtain weight loss without these medications.”

James Werner, a spokesperson at the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, blamed the coverage change on the state legislature’s failure to budget enough money for Medicaid.

In an email to Stateline, Werner said coverage of GLP1s for weight loss “would be reconsidered if Medicaid is fully funded.”

Some states are trying to maintain at least some coverage of the expensive drugs by tightening the eligibility requirements for a prescription, according to Colleen Becker, a project manager at the National Conference of State Legislatures, a policy research group.

“States are really looking at how to balance access and provide that access to patients, but they’re stewards of their budgets, and they need to be good stewards of it,” Becker said.

Michigan and Pennsylvania are among the states considering such options. Meanwhile, Connecticut has decided to maintain coverage of weight-loss drugs for state employees, but to require beneficiaries to try online weight-loss counseling before they can get a prescription.

Some future possibilities

One state, North Dakota, has taken a different approach to GLP-1 coverage after legislation that would have required the state’s Medicaid program to cover the drug failed. Instead, North Dakota this year became the first state to mandate that insurers on the state’s Affordable Care Act marketplace cover the drugs for weight loss.

North Dakota Deputy Insurance Commissioner John Arnold said the insurance department calculated that the mandate wouldn’t cause insurance premiums to rise significantly.

“It’s not that anybody can walk into the doctor’s office and say, ‘Hey, I want to have this covered,’” Arnold said. “It is really for those who have a medical need for the drugs, then it would be covered.”

The insurance department had to ask the legislature for permission to make the change, according to North Dakota Republican House Speaker Robin Weisz. He said insurance carriers were concerned that it was going to be “open season for everybody who could lose 20 or 30 pounds.”

He said it will take time to see whether the policy raises insurance premiums.

“If the carriers can come in a couple years and say, ‘Wow, here’s what we’ve spent on these … we’ll take a hard look at it,” Weisz said. “But, it’s way too early to tell at this point.”

Arnold says other states may have the flexibility to consider mandating ACA insurers to cover the drugs.

“Our biggest concern was reducing those comorbidities and the long-term impact that that has on the cost of insurance in general, because more comorbidities means more claims,” Arnold said, referring to diseases and conditions associated with obesity.

Stateline reporter Shalina Chatlani can be reached at schatlani@stateline.org.

Children are pictured at an Autism Speaks Light it Up Blue Autism Awareness Celebration at Chicago Children's Museum in April 2017. State Medicaid agencies are struggling to pay for applied behavior analysis, an intensive therapy for children with autism. (Photo by Daniel Boczarski/Getty Images for Autism Speaks)

State Medicaid agencies are struggling to pay for an intensive therapy for children with autism — and looming federal Medicaid cuts are likely to make the problem worse.

Parents of children and young adults who receive applied behavior analysis, or ABA, worry states’ cost-saving measures will make it harder for them to get vital services. About 5% of children ages 3 to 17 on public insurance have autism spectrum disorder, compared with 2% who have private insurance, according to a CDC survey.

Many families and autism therapists say ABA can help improve communication and social skills, sharpen memory and focus, and replace challenging behaviors with positive ones. ABA therapy can range from 10 to 40 hours per week in different settings, including home and school. That makes it expensive.

In 2014, the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services mandated that all state Medicaid programs cover comprehensive autism services for children. It did not explicitly require coverage of ABA, but by 2022, every state Medicaid program covered ABA.

In addition, more kids are getting diagnosed with autism as screenings increase. As a result, state spending on the service has skyrocketed. In Indiana, for example, Medicaid spending on ABA therapy grew from $21 million in 2017 to $611 million in 2023. The sharp increase has prompted Indiana, and other states, to take steps to control costs.

Meanwhile, federal auditors have begun examining states’ coverage of ABA services to ferret out fraud and abuse.

Mariel Fernandez, vice president of government affairs at the Council of Autism Service Providers, a nonprofit trade association, acknowledged that states are facing difficult choices.

“For such a costly and intensive service, the states need to explore how to best reimburse this benefit so that it’s sustainable and promotes quality,” said Fernandez, who is also a board-certified behavioral analyst. “Is [the rate] going to bankrupt Medicaid? Is it going to ensure that people are actually receiving the service?”

The Medicaid changes included in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that President Donald Trump signed in July will increase the pressure: The law includes more than $900 billion in federal spending cuts over the next decade. Medicaid is funded jointly by the federal government and the states.

Meanwhile, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has described autism as a rapidly growing “epidemic” in the U.S. and has made it a major focus of his tenure. Kennedy has promoted the debunked theory that there’s a link between childhood vaccines and autism.

Curbing costs

Several states this year have considered curbing ABA costs by capping therapy hours, tightening provider enrollment rules, reducing reimbursement rates or changing patient eligibility rules. A bill in New York, for example, would establish a 680-hour annual cap on ABA services.

But nowhere has the issue been more prominent than in Indiana, where Medicaid has covered ABA therapy since 2016.

Governor’s group recommends ABA usage cap, rate changes as Medicaid costs rise

Historically, Indiana Medicaid has reimbursed ABA providers for most services at a rate of 40%, regardless of what they charged.

That “created some very strange incentives for a small portion of the provider network,” said Jason McManus, president of Indiana Providers of Effective Autism Treatment (InPEAT), which represents smaller ABA providers in Indiana and larger providers that operate in Indiana and elsewhere. “You had folks who were charging exorbitant amounts for the service.”

Beginning in 2024, Indiana lowered its reimbursement rate to about $68 per hour — and received plenty of pushback.

“That did have an impact on the provider community,” McManus said. “You had a lot of folks, smaller shops, who ended up closing their doors or consolidating with other organizations. So that was disruptive.”

And that year, the HHS inspector general issued a report which found that Indiana’s Medicaid program made at least $56 million in “improper” payments to ABA therapy providers in 2019 and 2020.

The state’s rapidly rising ABA costs and the federal audit prompted Republican Gov. Mike Braun to issue an executive order earlier this year creating a working group to examine ways to cut costs without compromising quality.

The group crafted recommendations to correct the problems identified in the federal audit and put ABA coverage on a financially sustainable path. Without changes in the state’s reimbursement policies, the group concluded, Indiana’s Medicaid spending on ABA therapy would reach a projected $825 million by 2029.

This month, Braun unveiled the group’s recommendations, which include the creation of a new ABA office to increase oversight and lower reimbursement rates, which the state has not yet detailed.

ABA allows people with autism “to obtain the highest level of independence that’s possible for them,” said McManus, who served on the working group.

“But from a state perspective, I can see how, if you’re purely just looking at the cost, you would say, ‘Wow, this is a cost that has grown over time, and if absent all other contexts, this is something we need to pay attention to, because it’s unsustainable.’”

Nebraska rate cut

In Nebraska, state officials also have been looking for ways to control spiraling ABA costs: Last year, Nebraska Medicaid paid out more than $85 million for ABA therapy, a surge from $4.6 million in 2020.

In July, the state announced that it would cut its Medicaid reimbursement rates for ABA, including a 48% cut to reimbursement for direct therapy provided by a behavior technician. That brought the rate to $74.80 per hour, down from about $144 per hour. Rates for therapy by physicians or other board-certified professionals also were reduced by about 37%.

Many providers saw the cuts coming, as the state has had the highest hourly reimbursement rate in the nation.

“It would be fiscally irresponsible of the state to maintain that,” said Leila Allen, vice president of external affairs at Lighthouse Autism Center, which has ABA therapy centers in Nebraska as well as in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan and North Carolina.

Sam Wallach, president of Attain, an ABA therapy provider that operates in Nebraska and a dozen other states and Washington, D.C., said the service is “life-changing for children and families.” He views the ABA reduction as a “correction” that will make it feasible for Nebraska Medicaid to continue to cover it.

“The previous rates were well above what most Medicaid programs pay nationally, and while that created short-term benefits, it wasn’t realistic or sustainable,” Wallach said.

But some providers are taking issue with the way Nebraska went about those cuts.

For example, the state provided only 30 days’ notice before making the change. “There were providers that within 30 days had to tell their staff, ‘We’re so sorry. We have to cut your salary by ‘x’ percent in 30 days,’” Allen said.

Nebraska also didn’t examine how much it costs to provide ABA in the state, she said. The new rate is closer to what neighboring states, such as Iowa, pay. But therapists are few and far between in sparsely populated Nebraska, and families there often have to travel long distances to reach ABA providers.

“There was no cost survey to determine what the cost should be,” said Allen. “They didn’t take into account that you do have to pay people a little bit more to be able to work as behavior analysts in Nebraska.”

Finding ABA therapists in Nebraska is particularly difficult for families with older kids. Angela Gleason, executive secretary on the board of autism advocacy organization Arc of Nebraska, has a 13-year-old son with autism. She said many companies only serve very young children, up to age 6.

“So for families like mine, it’s then hard to even find a company that will serve his age and will provide that kind of support,” she said. To be able to afford therapy, her son Teddy has Medicaid coverage as his secondary insurance. ABA therapy helps him with socializing and speaking with his speech delay.

“He needs a lot more help throughout his day than a normal 13-year-old without autism might need,” Gleason said.

North Carolina court case

In North Carolina, the cost of covering autism services, including ABA, will total an estimated $639 million in fiscal 2026, up 425% from 2022, according to the state’s Medicaid agency. About five autism providers made up roughly 41% of the state’s increase in spending in fiscal year 2023-2024, according to the state.

Effective on Oct. 1, North Carolina Medicaid cut reimbursement rates for all kinds of health care services, arguing that state legislators had not budgeted enough money to keep up with rising costs. The reductions, which ranged from 3% to 10%, included a 10% cut to the reimbursement rate for autism services, including ABA therapy.

But the families of 21 children immediately sued the state Department of Health and Human Services to halt the move, arguing that it was discriminatory because it targeted children with disabilities.

Earlier this month, the families won a preliminary injunction temporarily halting the rate cut.

But families across the state are on edge as children with autism often see multiple providers — psychologists and speech language pathologists, for example — whose rate cuts were not paused, according to Allen, of Lighthouse Autism Center.

David Laxton, director of communications for the Autism Society of North Carolina, which is also a provider, said many providers won’t be able to absorb the rate reductions and continue operating.

“At some point, the math is not going to math,” Laxton said.

“It’s very stressful for families, because right now, there’s not an end in sight,” Laxton said. “There’s agreement that this [service] is very important, but there’s not been action to bring an end to the cuts.”

Stateline reporter Nada Hassanein can be reached at nhassanein@stateline.org.

In early November, the South Carolina Department of Public Health opened a pop-up mobile vaccine clinic in a library parking lot in Boiling Springs. Dozens of people in South Carolina’s Upstate region have been diagnosed with measles this fall. (Photo by Lauren Sausser/KFF Health News)

This article first appeared on KFF Health News.

BOILING SPRINGS, S.C. — Near the back corner of the local library’s parking lot, largely out of view from the main road, the South Carolina Department of Public Health opened a pop-up clinic in early November, offering free measles vaccines to adults and children.

Spartanburg County, in South Carolina’s Upstate region, has been fighting a measles outbreak since early October, with more than 50 cases identified. Health officials have encouraged people who are unvaccinated to get a shot by visiting its mobile vaccine clinic at any of its several stops throughout the county.

But on a Monday afternoon in Boiling Springs, only one person showed up.

“It’s progress. That progress is slow,” Linda Bell, the state epidemiologist with the Department of Public Health, said during a recent press briefing. “We had hoped to see a more robust uptake than that in our mobile health units.”

As South Carolina tries to contain its measles outbreak, public health officials across the nation are concerned that the highly contagious virus is making a major comeback. The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has tallied more than 1,700 measles cases and 45 outbreaks in 2025. The largest started in Texas, where hundreds of people were infected and two children died.

For the first time in more than two decades, the United States is poised to lose its measles elimination status, a designation indicating that outbreaks are rare and rapidly contained.

South Carolina’s measles outbreak isn’t yet as large as those in other states, such as New Mexico, Arizona and Kansas. But it shows how a confluence of larger national trends — including historically low vaccination rates, skepticism fueled by the pandemic, misinformation and “health freedom” ideologies promoted by conservative politicians — have put some communities at risk for the reemergence of a preventable, potentially deadly virus.

“Everyone talks about it being the canary in the coal mine because it’s the most contagious infectious disease out there,” said Josh Michaud, associate director for global and public health policy at KFF, a health information nonprofit that includes KFF Health News. “The logic is indisputable that we’re likely to see more outbreaks.”

Schools and ‘small brush fires’

Spartanburg’s vaccination rate is among the lowest of South Carolina’s 46 counties. And that was true “even before COVID,” said Chris Lombardozzi, a senior vice president with the Spartanburg Regional Healthcare System.

Nearly 6,000 children in Spartanburg County schools last year — 10% of the total enrollment — either received an exemption allowing them to forgo required vaccinations or did not meet vaccine requirements, according to data published by the state.

Lombardozzi said the county’s low vaccination rate is tied to misinformation not only published on social media but also spread by “a variety of nonmedical leaders over the years.”

The pandemic made things worse. Michaud said that fear and misinformation surrounding COVID-19 vaccines “threw gasoline on the fire of people’s vaccine skepticism.” In some cases, that skepticism transferred to childhood vaccines, which historically have been less controversial, he said.

This made communities like Spartanburg County with low vaccination rates more vulnerable. “Which is why we’re seeing constant, small brush fires of measles outbreaks,” Michaud said.

In Spartanburg, the overall percentage of students with required immunizations fell from 95.1% to 90% between the 2020-21 and 2024-25 academic years. Public health officials say a minimum of 95% is required to prevent significant spread of measles.

Children who attend public and private schools in South Carolina are required to show that they’ve received some vaccinations, including the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine, but religious exemptions are relatively easy to obtain. The exemption form must be notarized, but it does not require a doctor’s note or any disclosure about the family’s religious beliefs.

The number of students in South Carolina who have been granted religious exemptions has increased dramatically over the past decade. That’s particularly true in the Upstate region, where religious exemptions have increased sixfold from a decade ago. During the 2013-14 school year, 2,044 students in the Upstate were granted a religious exemption to the vaccine requirements, according to data published by The Post and Courier. By fall 2024, that number had jumped to more than 13,000.

Some schools are more exposed than others. The beginning of the South Carolina outbreak was largely linked to one public charter school, Global Academy of South Carolina, where only 17% of the 605 students enrolled during the 2024-25 school year provided documentation showing they had received their required vaccinations, according to data published by the Department of Public Health.

No one from Global Academy responded to interview requests.

‘Health freedom’

In April, after visiting a Texas family whose daughter had died from measles, U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. wrote on social media that the “most effective way to prevent the spread of measles is the MMR vaccine.” He made a similar statement during an interview on “Dr. Phil” later that month.

But these endorsements stand at odds with other statements Kennedy has made that cast doubt on vaccine safety and have falsely linked vaccines with autism. The CDC, under his authority, now claims such links “have been ignored by health authorities.”

“What would I do if I could go back in time and I could avoid giving my children the vaccines that I gave them?” he said on a podcast in 2020. “I would do anything for that. I would pay anything to be able to do that.”

Throughout 2025, he has made other misleading or unsupported statements. During a congressional hearing in September, Kennedy defended his past claims that he was not anti-vaccine but affirmed his stated position that no vaccines are safe or effective.

Emily Hilliard, a spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services, told KFF Health News that Kennedy is “pro-safety, pro-transparency and pro-accountability.” Hilliard said HHS is working with “state and local partners in South Carolina” and in other states to provide support during the measles outbreaks.

Meanwhile, Kennedy has frequently championed the idea of health freedom, or freedom of choice, regarding vaccines, a talking point that has taken root among Republicans.

That has had a “chilling effect all the way down through state and local lawmakers,” Michaud said, making some leaders hesitant to talk about the threat that the ongoing measles outbreaks poses or the effectiveness and safety of the MMR vaccine.

Brandon Charochak, a spokesperson for South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster, said the governor was not available to be interviewed for this article but referenced McMaster’s comment from October that measles “is a dangerous disease, but in terms of diseases, it’s not one that we should panic about.”

On a separate occasion that month, the Republican governor said he does not support vaccine mandates. “We’re not going to have mandates,” he said, “and I think we are responding properly.”

Even though the South Carolina Department of Public Health has repeatedly encouraged measles vaccines, the push has been notably quieter than the agency’s COVID-19 vaccine outreach efforts.

In 2021, for example, the agency partnered with breweries throughout the state for a campaign called “Shot and a Chaser,” which rewarded people who got a COVID-19 vaccine with a free beer or soda. By contrast, the pop-up measles vaccine clinic at the Boiling Springs Library featured no flashy signage, no freebies, and wasn’t visible from the library’s main entrance.

Edward Simmer, interim director of the Department of Public Health, would not speak to KFF Health News about the measles outbreak. During a legislative hearing in April, Republican state lawmakers voted against his permanent confirmation because of his past support for COVID-19 vaccines and masking. One lawmaker specifically criticized the agency during that hearing for the Shot and a Chaser campaign.

Public health officials in other states also have been blocked from new roles because of their COVID-19 response. In Missouri, where MMR vaccine rates have declined among kindergartners since 2020 and measles cases have been reported this year, Republican lawmakers rejected a public health director in 2022 after vaccine opponents protested his appointment.

In South Carolina, Simmer, lacking lawmakers’ confirmation, leads the public health agency in an interim capacity.

South Carolina Sen. Tom Davis of Beaufort was the only Republican on the Senate Medical Affairs Committee who voted to confirm Simmer in April. He told KFF Health News that his Republican colleagues raised valid questions about Simmer’s past support for COVID-19 vaccines.

But, Davis said, it would be “tremendously unfortunate and not beneficial from a public health perspective” if the Republican Party just took a stance against vaccines “as a matter of policy.”

The Department of Public Health had administered 44 doses of the MMR vaccine through its mobile health unit from October to mid-November. The last mobile vaccine clinic was scheduled for Nov. 24. But health officials are encouraged that patients are seeking vaccines elsewhere. The agency’s tracking system shows that providers across Spartanburg County administered more than twice as many measles vaccines in October as they did a year ago.

As of mid-November, more than 130 people remained in quarantine, most of them students at local elementary and middle schools. Cases have also been linked to a church and Greenville-Spartanburg International Airport.

“We’re reminding people that travel for the upcoming holidays increases the risk of exposures greatly,” said Bell, the state epidemiologist. “Due to that risk, we’re encouraging people to consider getting vaccinated now.”

KFF Health News correspondent Amy Maxmen contributed to this report. KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — an independent source of health policy research, polling and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

President Donald Trump speaks during an executive order signing in the Oval Office on Feb. 11, 2025. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

President Donald Trump said Friday he will try to reverse any law, pardon or still-in-effect executive order that former President Joe Biden signed with an autopen, though it wasn’t immediately clear how that would work or whether it would be legal. 

Trump declared in a social media post that any documents Biden signed with the autopen are “hereby terminated, and of no further force or effect.”

“I am hereby cancelling all Executive Orders, and anything else that was not directly signed by Crooked Joe Biden, because the people who operated the Autopen did so illegally,” Trump alleged. “Joe Biden was not involved in the Autopen process and, if he says he was, he will be brought up on charges of perjury. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

The White House press office didn’t immediately respond to a request for the list of documents Trump believes he has the ability to rescind based on the manner they were signed.

States Newsroom also asked the Trump administration if officials believe the president would need to sign an executive order in order to implement his social media post. 

Experts dismissed earlier autopen challenge 

The post was similar to one Trump published in March when he claimed any pardons Biden signed with the autopen were void, something legal experts said at the time was “absurd” and a “red herring.”

Trump brought up his frustration with autopen use again in June when he ordered the White House legal counsel and U.S. attorney general to investigate when and why Biden administration staff used an autopen. 

Trump said during an Oval Office appearance at the time he hadn’t found any evidence Biden aides violated the law.

“No, but I’ve uncovered the human mind,” Trump said. “I was in a debate with the human mind and I didn’t think he knew what the hell he was doing. So it’s one of those things, one of those problems. We can’t ever allow that to happen to our country.”

Biden and spokespeople working for him have repeatedly said he knew what official documents were being signed in his name and rejected claims that White House staff used the autopen without his authorization or knowledge. 

Biden released a statement in June following the Trump memorandum, saying the investigation “is nothing more than a distraction by Donald Trump and Congressional Republicans who are working to push disastrous legislation that would cut essential programs like Medicaid and raise costs on American families, all to pay for tax breaks for the ultra-wealthy and big corporations.”

“Let me be clear: I made the decisions during my presidency. I made the decisions about the pardons, executive orders, legislation, and proclamations,” Biden wrote at the time. “Any suggestion that I didn’t is ridiculous and false.”

While presidents have regularly rescinded their predecessors executive orders, usually within their first few days or weeks in office, Congress would very likely need to act in order to alter or eliminate any laws that Biden signed with an autopen. Trump seeking to overturn a law, or part of a law, unilaterally would likely lead to a lawsuit over whether he holds that power. 

Trump doesn’t cite legal authority

It also wasn’t immediately clear what legal authority Trump believes he has as president to undo pardons if Biden used an autopen to sign the documents. 

David Super, a constitutional and administrative law professor at Georgetown University, told States Newsroom in March that “the Constitution does not require signatures for pardons. It simply says the president has the power to pardon.”

“So if President Biden wanted to simply verbally tell someone they’re pardoned, he could do that. It wouldn’t have to be in writing at all,” he said. “Administratively, of course, we want things in writing. It makes things a lot simpler, but there’s no constitutional requirement.”

Ashley Murray contributed to this report. 

A small memorial of flowers and an American flag outside the Farragut West Metro station in Washington, D.C., near where two members of the West Virginia National Guard were shot on Nov. 26. (Photo by Andrew Leyden/Getty Images)

The United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia announced Friday it has charged the man who allegedly shot two National Guard members earlier this week with first-degree murder after one of the soldiers died as a result of her injuries. 

Other charges include three counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence and two counts of assault with intent to kill while armed. 

The attack shocked the country and has led to a renewed discussion about immigration policy as well as the war in Afghanistan and how the country withdrew during the Biden administration. 

President Donald Trump announced late Thursday night he intends to “permanently pause migration from all Third World Countries,” though he didn’t specify which countries would be included or exactly how such an order would be implemented. 

Trump wrote on social media he plans to “remove anyone who is not a net asset to the United States, or is incapable of loving our Country, end all Federal benefits and subsidies to noncitizens of our Country, denaturalize migrants who undermine domestic tranquility, and deport any Foreign National who is a public charge, security risk, or non-compatible with Western Civilization.”

The post came just hours after U.S. Army Spc. Sarah Beckstrom, 20, died from injuries she sustained during a Wednesday shooting a couple of blocks from the White House. The other victim, U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe, 24, remained hospitalized in critical condition. Both were West Virginia National Guard members.

The alleged shooter, Rahmanullah Lakanwal, 29, an Afghan national who worked with United States forces, entered the country on Sept. 8, 2021, as part of Operation Allies Welcome, according to a statement from Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.

No details of immigration proposals

The White House press office declined to say Friday which countries would have their residents barred from entering the United States under the new order, referring back to the president’s social media posts, which did not include a list.

“Only REVERSE MIGRATION can fully cure this situation,” Trump wrote. “Other than that, HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO ALL, except those that hate, steal, murder, and destroy everything that America stands for — You won’t be here for long!”

Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a Thursday afternoon statement the administration would pause immigration applications for Afghan nationals.

“Effective immediately, processing of all immigration requests relating to Afghan nationals is stopped indefinitely pending further review of security and vetting protocols,” she wrote. 

The Trump administration will also review “all asylum cases approved under the Biden Administration,” McLaughlin said, saying those cases required more vetting. 

Biden Afghanistan policy blamed

In a separate post, Trump blamed former President Joe Biden for allowing the alleged shooter into the country. 

McLaughlin echoed that sentiment.

Lakanwal “was paroled in by the Biden Administration. After that, Biden signed into law that parole program, and then entered into the 2023 Ahmed Court Settlement, which bound (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services) to adjudicate his asylum claim on an expedited basis. Regardless if his asylum was granted or not, this monster would not have been removed because of his parole.” 

The U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021, following two decades of war that began as a result of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, has been widely criticized.

Many of the Afghan nationals who aided the United States and allied countries were left behind as the Taliban quickly regained control. 

The nonprofit #AfghanEvac, formed in August 2021 to help resettle Afghan refugees, criticized the administration’s proposal to indefinitely halt the processing of immigration requests from Afghans.  

“Our allies are under attack today because of the actions of one deranged man. Those actions should not be ascribed to an entire community,” the organization posted on social media late Thursday.

In a lengthier statement issued Wednesday following the shooting of two National Guard members, the organization’s president, Shawn VanDiver, said #AfghanEvac “expects and fully supports the perpetrator facing full accountability and prosecution under the law.”

VanDiver continued: “AfghanEvac rejects any attempt to leverage this tragedy as a political ploy to isolate or harm Afghans who have resettled in the United States.”

Motive unknown

Lakanwal had been residing in Washington state and drove across the country before the shooting, according to Jeanine Pirro, U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia.

Officials investigating the shooting have yet to release a possible motive.

Lakanwal was granted asylum in the U.S. in April, according to reporting by many media outlets, including NPR.

The Department of Homeland Security did not confirm for States Newsroom the date Lakanwal was granted asylum.

FBI Director Kash Patel, left, at a press conference on Nov. 27, 2025, looks at photos of the two West Virginia National Guard soldiers shot in Washington, D.C., the previous day. They were identified as Andrew Wolfe, 24, and Sarah Beckstrom, 20.  (Photo by Andrew Leyden/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — West Virginia National Guard member U.S. Army Spc. Sarah Beckstrom, 20, one of the victims of a shooting near the White House, died Thursday, President Donald Trump said.

“She’s just passed away,” Trump said. “She’s no longer with us. She’s looking down at us.”

Trump, who was speaking with members of the military via video, said she was “magnificent in every way.”

A White House official said Trump spoke with Beckstrom’s parents on Thursday night.

The other victim, U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe, 24, underwent surgery and remained hospitalized in Washington, D.C., in critical condition.

“The other young man is fighting for his life,” Trump said. 

Earlier Thursday, federal law enforcement officials examined evidence collected from the home of the alleged lone gunman, who drove to the nation’s capital from Washington state to target the troops, officials said.

They did not disclose a motive for the attack in a busy area of offices and retail just blocks from the White House, the day before Thanksgiving.

Beckstrom and Wolfe underwent surgery and were hospitalized  after the suspect allegedly shot them in broad daylight Wednesday, according to Jeanine Pirro, U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia.

A military press release said Beckstrom, of Summersville, was assigned to the 863rd Military Police Company, 111th Engineer Brigade. Wolfe, of Martinsburg, was assigned to the Force Support Squadron, 167th Airlift Wing. 

Wolfe entered service on Feb. 5, 2019 and had been on orders in the district since the beginning of the mission in August. Beckstrom entered service on June 26, 2023 and also had been in the district since August.

“Their families are with them now. They are critical. I think you understand the meaning of that,” Pirro told reporters at a Thursday morning briefing.

The suspect, Rahmanullah Lakanwal, a 29-year-old Afghan refugee who worked with U.S. forces in Afghanistan, is currently facing three counts of assault with intent to kill while armed and possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, Pirro said, adding the charges are “appropriate” for now.

“It’s not clear, you know, how this is going to end up. But let me be perfectly clear about how it will end up in this office if one of them is to pass. And God forbid that happens, this is a murder one (charge). Period. End of the story,” Pirro said.

U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi told Fox News Thursday morning the Department of Justice will seek the death penalty if either of the guard members succumbs to their injuries.

Bondi said Beckstrom had volunteered to work over the holiday.

Brig. Gen. Leland Blanchard, commanding general of the National Guard in the District of Columbia, told reporters, “Regardless of the outcome, we know that their lives, their family life, their families’ lives are all changed forever because one person decided to do this horrific and evil thing.”

Pirro said the suspect “drove his vehicle across the country from the state of Washington with the intended target of coming to our nation’s capital.” 

Trump mobilized 800 National Guard members to the district in August, on the grounds of a “crime emergency,” despite a nearly 30-year low in violent crime in the city. 

Some of the guard troops were instructed they would be carrying service weapons while deployed in the district, according to an Aug. 17 report in the Wall Street Journal. 

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth told reporters Wednesday the administration will send an additional 500 National Guard troops to the district.

Fellow guard troops responded ‘immediately’

Shortly after 2 p.m. Eastern on Wednesday, at 17th and I streets NW, near the Farragut West Metro station, Lakanwal allegedly shot the first guard member, then “leans over and strikes the guardsman again,” Pirro said, not identifying which member was initially struck. 

Lakanwal then struck the second guard member “several times,” she said.

“Fellow guardsmen who were there responded immediately, engaging the suspect, neutralizing the threat, and subduing him at the scene. He was transported to a local hospital, where he remains as we speak, under heavy guard. Thanks to the swift and coordinated response of the National Guard and the Metropolitan Police Department, no additional victims were harmed, and the scene was secured within minutes,” Pirro said.

Kash Patel, director of the FBI, said the agency searched Lakanwal’s home last night in Bellingham, Washington, seizing multiple electronic devices and interviewing family members. Patel said the suspect is believed to have five children.

The gun Lakanwal used in the attack, a .357 Smith & Wesson revolver, is being analyzed at the FBI lab in Quantico, Virginia, Patel said.

Patel said the FBI is also interviewing interested parties in San Diego but would not provide further details on the “ongoing investigation.”

A ‘relationship’ with ‘partner forces’ in Afghanistan

Patel told reporters that he spoke to CIA Director John Ratcliffe Wednesday night and obtained “confirmation now that the subject had a relationship in Afghanistan with partner forces.”

“We are fully investigating that aspect of his background as well, to include any known associates that are either overseas or here in the United States of America,” Patel said.

Patel would not answer reporters’ questions about whether and when Lakanwal had been granted asylum in the U.S. 

The Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to States Newsroom’s request for a timeline.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem issued a statement Wednesday night confirming Lakanwal arrived in the U.S. on Sept. 8, 2021, as part of the Operation Allies Welcome.

The program was established after the U.S. military’s withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan “to support vulnerable Afghans, including those who worked alongside us in Afghanistan for the past two decades, as they safely resettle in the United States,” according to Department of Homeland archived information.

Noem did not provide any further information on Lakanwal’s asylum process.

The administration announced Wednesday night it will immediately halt any immigration requests from Afghan nationals.

Lakanwal had worked with a CIA-backed military unit in the southern Afghan province of Kandahar, Fox News reported Wednesday night. The CIA did not immediately respond to States Newsroom’s request for comment.

Guard deployment in the courts

Last week, a District of Columbia federal judge found the Trump administration’s deployment of the National Guard in the city illegal. However, Judge Jia Cobb paused her order for three weeks to give the Trump administration time to remove the guard members along with appealing her ruling.  

More than 2,000 members of the guard have remained in the district, and are expected to stay until the end of February, according to Cobb’s order.

The Trump administration on Wednesday asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in an emergency motion to intervene.

A pedestrian lifts his bike over snow piles after a storm in Buffalo, New York. Buffalo is among the older industrial cities where residential properties have drawn interest from corporate investors. (Photo by John Normile/Getty Images)

As corporate ownership of residential property across the country rises nationwide, researchers from the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy and the Center for Geospatial Solutions, which is housed at the institute, warn this rising trend has complicated the housing market for first-time buyers.

According to a joint “Who Owns America” report, nearly 9% of residential parcels in 500 U.S. counties are owned by a corporation. The concentrations exceed 20% in some cities, including St. Louis, Missouri; Harrisonburg, Virginia; and Franklin, Ohio. 

Researchers told Stateline they define “corporate ownership” as any rental property held under a formal business entity, whether a single-property LLC or large institutional investors such as Blackstone. They also track three factors: whether the owner is a business entity, whether it is based in- or out-of-state, and the size of its housing portfolio.

Roughly 2% of residential lots are owned by out-of-state investors. Investors have shifted their capital to older industrial metros such as St. Louis, along with Buffalo, New York, and Akron and Toledo in Ohio, where rents are rising and vacancy rates are extremely tight.

Although corporate owners currently hold a modest share of all residential parcels nationwide, their footprint is expanding steadily, said Reina Chano Murray, associate director at the Center for Geospatial Solutions.

“Corporate ownership may look small on paper, around nearly 9% across the counties we studied, but that share is steadily increasing,” said Chano Murray. “Even if corporate owners don’t make up a huge percentage right now, the trend line is clear. They’re growing.”

This past year, states took a major step in attempting to use legislation to rein in corporate ownership of rental homes. According to an August report by the conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute, lawmakers in 22 states have introduced such legislation in 2025, including in California, New York and Texas. Cities in Indiana have capped the percentage of single family homes that can be rented in a neighborhood. 

AEI, however, believes the issue of corporate land ownership is a “narrative [that] is not supported by empirical evidence,” highlighting that less than 1% of institutional investorship is in residential property, according to its report. 

Earlier this year, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, proposed a 75-day moratorium on institutional or corporate investors buying single- and two-family homes to disincentivize those groups from buying up housing stock at the cost of individual buyers.

Washington state lawmakers have floated caps on how many units a single investor may own. In 2024, Colorado enacted a law that gave cities a right of first refusal on some multifamily property sales. Locally, some redevelopment authorities in Cincinnati and Minneapolis are using their own capital to compete, by directly acquiring and preserving single-family homes for low- and moderate-income buyers.

The impact of corporate residential ownership, researchers at the Lincoln Institute say, is most severe for first-time buyers, who are increasingly outbid by cash offers from well-endowed investors. 

“For first-time homebuyers, it’s a double whammy. Units are being removed from the marketplace, and investor competition is driving up prices,” said George McCarthy, president and CEO of the Lincoln Institute. “Cash-only transactions make up nearly a third of single-family sales this year, and those aren’t families with briefcases full of cash.”

Stateline reporter Robbie Sequeira can be reached at rsequeira@stateline.org.

Joeniece Jackson surveys food available at the Elver Park Neighborhood Center food pantry on Tuesday, Nov. 25. (Photo by Erik Gunn/Wisconsin Examiner)

The Elver Park Neighborhood Center on the far southwest side of Madison has long been a familiar and welcome source of help for Joeniece Jackson and her four children.

Her oldest, now 14, attended the center’s after-school programs from an early age, as have her other three kids. And Joeniece says she’s enjoyed volunteering as well, or bringing the children of friends who may need child care unexpectedly.

But in the last few years, the center has served another purpose as well — as a food pantry for families who need to stretch their family meal budgets.

“The food pantry has gotten us through some of our hard times,” Jackson says.

The Elver Park after-school program isn’t the only one doing double duty. Across Wisconsin, other after-school programs have added food pantry services to their offerings for families who may not be able to afford to keep their cupboards full.

“After-school programs have long been doing after-school meals and snacks for kids,” says Daniel Gage of the Wisconsin Out of School Time Alliance, a nonprofit that advocates on behalf of after-school programs. Food pantry programs are a newer addition to that work. “After-school programs tend to be a place where people come together as parents are coming to pick up their kids.”

The recent federal shutdown, when federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Payments were halted Nov. 1, exacerbated the need. With the shutdown finished and SNAP funds flowing again, that has eased off, but only slightly.

The Elver Park Neighborhood Center and its after-school program are run by the Wisconsin Youth Company. The agency operates two neighborhood centers in Madison along with school-based after-school programs in Dane County and  Waukesha County.

Elver Park’s food pantry began operating during the COVID-19 pandemic, when schools were closed and, for a time, the center’s after-school programs were on hold as well, according to Takela Harper, the assistant director of centers for Wisconsin Youth Company.

Originally the center partnered with the Madison Metropolitan School District to deliver food to school district families who needed it, Harper said. When schools and after-school programs reopened, the program converted to a store-style food pantry, where families come on Tuesdays and Thursdays to pick up donations of packaged as well as fresh foods.

At Elver Park, there’s been “a consistent flow” in traffic for the last couple of years, Harper says. But that doubled in October from the previous month, with about 30 to 50 families a week coming in for assistance.

In Nekoosa, located in Wood County in North Central Wisconsin, the Nekoosa School District launched a food pantry a year ago. The city has a population of about 2,500 and the school district an enrollment of just over 1,200.

Nikki Stearns organized the Nekoosa program while serving in Americorps with the local YMCA. Her Americorps assignment had her working with elementary school-age children, and she soon learned the extent of hunger in some of those kids.

“So many of my kids are hungry,” Stearns said. “I started bringing in snacks, and other teachers started bringing in snacks for students, too.”

A 2023 United Way report on ALICE families in the community — families on the edge and vulnerable to falling into poverty — documented how pervasive families are who cannot count on regular meals or an adequate supply of food .  

“In Nekoosa, 53% of our community is either living in poverty or one paycheck away,” Stearns says.

In the Nekoosa program, families who sign up receive a box of food each month. Some are also enrolled in FoodShare — Wisconsin’s name for the state’s SNAP benefits program. When SNAP payments stopped Nov. 1, however, the food pantry’s signups shot up.

Through September and October, the Nekoosa program served 38 people — eight to 10 families, Stearns said. That jumped to more than 50 in November after SNAP benefits stopped.

“The first day when SNAP benefits weren’t uploaded to people’s [electronic benefits] cards, I think I had 35 applications come in in one day,” Stearns said.
“Now we’re serving about 200 people.” Even with the resumption of SNAP after the end of the shutdown, the demand has not diminished significantly, she added.

The Nekoosa food pantry program had been housed with the YMCA after-school program, based at a middle school. In June, the school transferred the food pantry program to the operation of the YMCA, which moved it to share space with the Y’s child care program, where recipients pick up their monthly boxes of food.

Providing a monthly allotment of food proved to be the most practical way for the Nekoosa program to operate, Stearns said, because “I don’t always know what [food] donations we’ll get or how much funding we’ll have to support people.”

The Nekoosa program was launched as part of a Wisconsin Partnership Program grant that the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health made to the Marshfield Clinic. With the $500,000 grant, the clinic was able to fund seven projects across the state’s northern half to address food insecurity.

“When students are fed and have those basic needs met, with food as one of those basic needs, they certainly can learn and focus so much more,” says Jill Niemczyk, a health educator with the Marshfield Clinic’s Center for Community Health Advancement who has been coordinating the program.

Other projects included a food pantry expansion, a teen meal program, gardening projects and a variety of nutrition education and community engagement programs.

“Each one of our seven sites is doing something a little bit different,” Niemczyk says.

The grant is now in its second year. In the third and final year, she says, attention will turn to assisting the various recipients as they look at how to establish ongoing community support and build on what they have been doing.

Even with SNAP benefits restored with temporary legislation to fund the federal government through January, Stearns expects the need to address hunger and food insecurity to persist.

“I think a lot of people are feeling like the food crisis is addressed” because the shutdown ended, Stearns says. “But a lot of us in food security are nervous about January. There’s a pretty big need to focus on people being fed — students are going to school hungry, whether there’s FoodShare or not.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A medical worker pushes a stretcher through a hallway at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York City. States are passing laws to target private equity transactions of health care facilities, such as hospitals. (Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

As more private equity firms buy health care physician practices and facilities, states are pushing back on acquisitions that some critics say could potentially gut health care infrastructure. 

This year alone at least seven states, including California, Indiana, Massachusetts, Maine, New Mexico, Oregon and Washington, have enacted laws requiring more oversight over private equity acquisitions in health care. Private equity involves pooling resources from pension funds, endowments, sovereign wealth funds and wealthy individuals to buy controlling stakes in companies and boost their value — often with the goal of selling at a profit within a few years.

Private equity firms argue that their role in upgrading technology and increasing efficiency helps health care access, especially in rural and other underserved areas.

Private equity interest in health care has been around for a while, but really started to grow in the past decade, said John McDonough, a professor of public health practice at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. Now there are private equity interests “in every imaginable iteration of medical care,” from hospitals to nursing homes, hospice care, physician practices and even veterinary care, he said. 

This year, several states have passed laws to increase oversight and transparency of private equity’s continuing acquisitions. 

Massachusetts and California enacted laws requiring more groups that were not included under previous reporting requirements, such as private equity firms, real estate investment trusts and management service organizations, to now notify the state if they make a health care acquisition and to give the attorney general more power to investigate the transactions. Indiana passed a law that gives the attorney general authority to investigate market concentration. 

Oregon passed an oversight law that not only limits how much private equity firms can buy up a health care market, but also bars private equity firms from having any control over clinical operations. The law also gives the state power to block any pending transitions that violate the law. California also enacted another law that prohibits private investors from interfering with the judgment of physicians and dentists. 

New Mexico passed a law that strengthened its 2024 Health Care Consolidation Oversight Act, which temporarily gave the state regulators more oversight over transactions. The new law makes that oversight authority permanent and more expansive, while also establishing penalties for non-compliance with reporting requirements. And Washington state passed a transparency law creating a registry of all health care entities. 

Maine passed a law to impose a one-year moratorium on all private equity or real estate investment trust purchases of hospitals. 

“The purpose of the dealmaking is to enrich the owners as quickly as possible, and then get out and move on to your next conquest,” McDonough said. “And so there’s a fundamental conflict there between duty to patients as a primary obligation and return on profits to shareholders.” 

According to researchers from the University of California, Berkeley, the number of acquisitions of physician practices rose from 816 in 2012, to 5,779 in 2021. Researchers also found that some single private equity firms captured 30-50% of specialty practices in local markets.

With limited congressional oversight on private equity actions in health care, states play a critical role in reining in predatory practices, said Michael Fenne, senior policy coordinator at the Private Equity Stakeholder Project, a watchdog group that monitors private equity activity.

“There’s not really federal law that targets private equity acquisitions in the same way [as laws] that states have been passing recently,” he said. 

Stateline reporter Shalina Chatlani can be reached at schatlani@stateline.org.

The entrance to a Big Lots store in Portland with a SNAP eligibility sign. Up to 3,000 Oregonians who came to the U.S. as refugees, asylum seekers or through other humanitarian protection programs would lose access to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program under new federal rules challenged by Oregon and other states. (Stock photo by hapabapa/Getty Images)

On the eve of Thanksgiving, Oregon is co-leading a group of Democratic attorneys general in suing the U.S. Department of Agriculture and its leader Brooke Rollins over abrupt cuts to food assistance for refugees and asylum seekers.

The cuts could affect up to 3,000 Oregonians who rely on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, and who came to the U.S. as refugees, asylum seekers or through other humanitarian protection programs, according to state Attorney General Dan Rayfield.

The attorneys general argue in their lawsuit, filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Oregon, that Rollins broke federal law by attempting to cut off food assistance for some non-citizen groups even after they’ve obtained permanent residency, and that the USDA violated its own rules for issuing new guidance to states.

Rollins gave states’ SNAP agencies one day, rather than the standard 120 days, to adjust and respond to the new guidance or face steep penalties.

“We’re one of the most wealthy countries in the world, and no one should go hungry in America,” Rayfield said at a virtual news conference on Wednesday. “It’s absolutely absurd that we’re having this press conference here today, a day before Thanksgiving.”

Oregon is co-leading the suit with New York, and is joined by 20 other states and the District of Columbia. It is Oregon’s 48th lawsuit against the federal government since President Donald Trump began his second term in January.

Confusion sown

Congressional Republicans did eliminate SNAP eligibility for some refugees and asylum seekers in the GOP tax and spending megabill they passed this summer, several attorneys general at the news conference explained, but it did not make those groups permanently ineligible for SNAP after they’ve obtained green cards and permanent resident status. Furthermore, federal law prohibits this, they argue.

But an Oct. 31 memo from USDA Associate Administrator Ronald Ward to states’ SNAP agencies listing some refugee and asylum groups as “not eligible” and others not eligible until they’ve been permanent residents for five years, has sown confusion.

The memo was sent on a Saturday in the midst of the government shutdown, and the state SNAP agencies were given one day to respond.

“Federal law is specific and says that refugees, asylees, humanitarian parolees and other vulnerable legal immigrants are eligible for SNAP benefits as soon as they obtain their green cards and meet standard program requirements,” California Attorney General Rob Bonta said at the news conference. “The administration does not have the power to rewrite these rules just because they don’t like them.”

In a Nov. 19 letter, the attorneys general collectively asked Rollins to correct the error and explain why the 120-day standard for response was not being honored, but they did not receive a response, they said, necessitating the lawsuit.

Bonta said the mixed messaging from USDA is not happening in a vacuum.

“Families who rely on SNAP are still recovering from the whiplash of the recent government shutdown, when the Trump administration tried to block November SNAP benefits,” he said.

The Democratic attorneys general successfully fought that attempted block and two judges ordered the benefits paid.

“The reality is, after losing in court again and again, the Trump administration is still trying to find ways to deprive families that are barely scraping by of basic food assistance that the law affords them,” Bonta said. “They are working overtime to deprive hungry Americans of food.”

Members of law enforcement and National Guard soldiers respond to a shooting of two National Guard members on Nov. 26, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Andrew Leyden/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Two National Guard members from West Virginia were in critical condition Wednesday evening after being shot near the White House in Washington, D.C., officials said.

FBI Director Kash Patel, a Metropolitan Police Department leader and Mayor Muriel Bowser emphasized during a press conference the investigation was in the preliminary stages, but said the shooting was “targeted” and that one suspect, who was also shot, was in custody. 

“At approximately 2:15 this afternoon, members of the D.C. National Guard were on high visibility patrols in the area of 17th and I Street Northwest when a suspect came around the corner, raised his arm with a firearm and discharged at the National Guard members,” MPD Executive Assistant Chief Jeffery Carroll said. 

“There were other (National Guard) members that were in the area. They were able to, after some back and forth … subdue the individual and bring them into custody,” Carroll added. “Within moments, members of law enforcement in the area were also able to assist and bring that individual into custody.”

The Department of Homeland Security in a press release late Wednesday identified the suspect as an Afghan national who entered the U.S. in September 2021. Numerous news reports gave his name as Rahmanullah Lakanwal. The Associated Press, citing a law enforcement official not authorized to speak publicly, reported the suspect sustained “injuries that are not believed to be life-threatening.”

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services posted late Wednesday that “Effective immediately, processing of all immigration requests relating to Afghan nationals is stopped indefinitely pending further review of security and vetting protocols.”

Carroll said there were no other suspects at the time of the press conference, in the early evening, and that law enforcement officials had reviewed video footage from the area where the shooting took place. 

“It appears, like I said, to be a lone gunman that raised the firearm and ambushed these members of the National Guard, and he was quickly taken into custody by other National Guard members and law enforcement members,” he said. 

The guardsmen were armed, but Carroll said investigators had not yet determined if they shot back or how the suspect, whom he did not name, was shot. 

“At this point, we’re still investigating exactly who shot the individual. It’s not clear at this time,” he said. 

Officials were also not yet sure “what kind of weapon” the suspect used during the shooting, which Carroll said “happened right in front of the Metro, although there is no indication that the perpetrator was on the Metro.” The Metro is the district’s public transit system.

Bowser reiterated during the press conference that the two National Guard members were in critical condition and referred to the shooting as “targeted.” 

Trump delivers remarks

President Donald Trump delivered brief remarks Wednesday night from Florida, condemning the “monstrous, ambush-style attack.”

Trump praised his deployment of guard troops to the district as “part of the most successful public safety and national security mission in the history of our nation’s capital.”

“This heinous assault was an act of evil, an act of hatred and an act of terror. It was a crime against our entire nation. It was a crime against humanity. The hearts of all Americans tonight are with those two members of the West Virginia National Guard and their families,” Trump said in a recorded video message posted on his social media platform, Truth Social, around 9:20 p.m. Eastern. 

Trump said “based on the best available information” the suspect is from Afghanistan, which he called “a hellhole on Earth” and that he had been “flown in” by former President Joe Biden.

Trump said his administration will “re-examine every single alien who has entered our country from Afghanistan under Biden.” 

Biden established a program to bring Afghans who assisted American troops during two decades of war to the United States after his administration withdrew troops in August 2021.

FBI and partners to lead investigation

Patel said the investigation will be treated as an assault on a federal law enforcement officer. 

“The FBI will lead out on that mission with our interagency partners to include the Department of Homeland Security, Secret Service, ATF, DEA, and we’re thankful for the mayor’s assistance in this matter,” Patel said. “The Metropolitan Police Department and their skills in investigating homicides and gun shootings in this city is exceptional. 

“We will work together collaboratively, because this is a matter of national security, because it’s a matter of pride.”

West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey wrote on social media before the press conference that the guard members had died, though he later posted he was hearing “conflicting reports about the condition of our two Guard members and will provide additional updates once we receive more complete information.”

“Our prayers are with these brave service members, their families, and the entire Guard community,” he added. 

Trump was briefed on the shooting and was “actively monitoring this tragic situation,” according to a statement Wednesday afternoon from White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt. The shooting happened just one day before Thanksgiving. 

Trump posted on social media that both guardsmen were “critically wounded” and taken to two separate hospitals. The shooter, he added, was “also severely wounded, but regardless, will pay a very steep price.”

Trump mobilized 800 National Guard members to the district in August, on the grounds of a “crime emergency,” despite a nearly 30-year low in violent crime in the city. 

Some of the guard troops were instructed they would be carrying service weapons while deployed in the district, according to an Aug. 17 report in the Wall Street Journal. 

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth told reporters Wednesday the administration will send an additional 500 National Guard troops to the district.

“This will only stiffen our resolve to ensure that we make Washington DC safe and beautiful,” Hegseth said.

The White House was placed on lockdown for a period due to the shooting, according to a White House official. Trump and first lady Melania Trump were not present at the time of the shooting.

Last week, a District of Columbia federal judge found the Trump administration’s deployment of the National Guard in the city illegal. However, Judge Jia Cobb paused her order for three weeks to give the Trump administration time to remove the guard members along with appealing her ruling.  

More than 2,000 members of the guard have remained in the district, and are expected to stay until the end of February, according to Cobb’s order.

The Trump administration on Wednesday asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in an emergency motion to intervene.

When Trump mobilized the Guard, he also federalized the district’s police force for 30 days. While the federalization of the police force expired, Trump has kept the National Guard in the district.

Since then, Republican governors have agreed to send their own Guard members to the district, from Louisiana, Ohio, South Carolina and West Virginia, among others. 

Lawmakers react

Members of Congress responded to the initial reports of the shooting with prayers and gratitude for the service members. 

“Praying for the National Guard members wounded in this horrific shooting,” U.S. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., wrote on social media. “Thankful for the brave law enforcement officers and first responders who swiftly apprehended a suspect. There is no place for violence in America.”

Sen. Joni Ernst, an Iowa Republican and retired lieutenant colonel in the Iowa National Guard, called for prayers for the victims. 

“Join me in praying for the two National Guardsmen shot in D.C. and their families,” she said. “Our men and women in uniform truly put their lives on the line to keep us safe and deserve our greatest respect.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., wrote he was “closely monitoring the situation and am praying for the wounded National Guardsmen and their families.”

“My heart breaks for the victims of this horrific shooting in Washington DC near the White House,” Schumer wrote. “I thank all the first responders for their quick action to capture the suspect.”

Speaking in Fort Campbell, Kentucky, Vice President JD Vance, a U.S. Marine Corps veteran, said the attack was “a somber reminder.”

“Our soldiers are the sword and the shield of the United States of America,” he said. “And as a person who goes into work every single day in that building and knows that there are a lot of people who wear the uniform of the United States Army, let me just say very personally thank them for what they’re doing.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., wrote that his “thoughts and prayers are with the National Guardsmen who were attacked this afternoon. I urge you to keep them in your prayers too.”

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., wrote the “National Guard has done heroic work this year working around the clock to make our nation’s capital safe again. We are forever grateful for the swift actions of law enforcement and for all those who risk their own lives to protect everyone else.”

Jacob Fischler and Leann Ray contributed to this report.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem at a Nashville press conference on July 18, 2025, to discuss arrests of immigrants during recent Immigration and Customs Enforcement sweeps. (Photo by John Partipilo/Tennessee Lookout)

WASHINGTON — Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced Wednesday the end of temporary protected status for roughly 330,000 nationals from Haiti by February, opening them up to deportations.

In her reasoning, Noem said extending temporary protected status to Haitians would be “contrary to the national interest of the United States” and will end on Feb. 3.

TPS is granted to nationals who hail from countries deemed too dangerous for a return, due to violence or major natural disasters. 

While TPS was granted to Haitians due to the 2010 earthquake, conditions in the country have worsened amid rising gang violence since 2021. 

“Moreover, even if the Department found that there existed conditions that were extraordinary and temporary that prevented Haitian nationals …from returning in safety, termination of Temporary Protected Status of Haiti is still required because it is contrary to the national interest of the United States to permit Haitian nationals … to remain temporarily in the United States,” according to the notice in the Federal Register. 

The notice is meant to comply with a court order earlier this year that barred DHS from ending TPS for nationals from Haiti until protections were set to expire in February. 

States with large Haitian immigrant populations include Florida, New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, according to the Migration Policy Institute, a think tank that studies global migration.

Noem, who stated in her confirmation hearing that she planned to curtail TPS renewals, has moved to end protections for nationals from Afghanistan, Cameroon, Honduras, Nepal, Nicaragua, Syria and Venezuela.

Prisoners look out of their cell as Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem tours the Terrorist Confinement Center, or CECOT, in Tecoluca, El Salvador, on March 26, 2025. (Photo by Alex Brandon-Pool/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The Department of Justice acknowledged in a court filing that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem made the call to continue removals of Venezuelans to a brutal Salvadoran prison, despite a federal judge’s order to stop the deportations.

The Tuesday filing noted that Noem was advised by top officials at the Justice Department she did not need to comply with the March 15 judicial order to halt the deportations because it had been issued after the flights took off. The Venezuelan nationals were deported under an obscure wartime law called the Alien Enemies Act.

“After receiving that legal advice, Secretary Noem directed that the AEA detainees who had been removed from the United States before the Court’s order could be transferred to the custody of El Salvador,” according to the DOJ filing. “That decision was lawful and was consistent with a reasonable interpretation of the Court’s order.”

Noem’s decision sent 137 Venezuelan men to a mega-prison for months until the Venezuelan government could broker a prison swap with El Salvador and the United States to have the men returned. 

In an emergency March 15 order, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg said the planes carrying the Venezuelans had to return to the United States.

They did not have the opportunity to challenge their removal, which was a violation of their due process rights, the American Civil Liberties Union has argued in its case against the Trump administration. 

Tuesday’s filing represents a shift in legal strategy from the administration, which had initially argued that because Boasberg’s order was verbal and not written, his temporary restraining order carried no weight. 

Contempt probe

The filing comes after Boasberg resumed a contempt investigation to identify the Trump administration officials involved in authorizing the Venezuelans’ removals.

Last week, Boasberg ordered the administration to submit filings on how to proceed with the contempt inquiry.

“I certainly intend to find out what happened that day,” Boasberg said last week.

Tuesday’s filing argued that contempt proceedings are not needed and that “the Government maintains that its actions did not violate the Court’s order.”

The ACLU, which is representing the deported men, in its filing on the contempt issue urged Boasberg to request testimony from nine current and former officials from the Homeland Security and Justice departments. 

The ACLU also said the government should identify “all individuals involved in the decision… regardless of whether they were the ultimate decision-maker or had direct input into the decision, as well as all those with knowledge of the decision-making process.”

Once those people had been identified, Boasberg could determine in what order testimony should be gathered.